Bipolar 2 From Inside and Out

Posts tagged ‘mental illness’

What’s the Future of Ketamine Treatment?

You’ve likely heard about the use of ketamine and other psychedelic drugs in the treatment of SMI. Many people have found it helpful for alleviating—though not curing—treatment-resistant depression and PTSD. Ketamine, long used as a surgical anesthetic, is given for mental health purposes via IV or injection as an off-label use or as an FDA-approved nasal spray, under the supervision of a doctor.

It’s that supervision of a doctor that’s proving to be a problem, now in Texas and perhaps in other states soon.

On December 3rd of this year, MindSite News Daily published a story about ketamine being under fire in Texas.

The state of Texas has permitted clinics to administer ketamine if they’re under the supervision of a licensed physician, such as an anesthesiologist—though not always one onsite. The off-site doctor sometimes has nurse practitioners, paramedics, or physicians’ assistants perform the actual procedure at the clinic. It’s a form of telemedicine. But a change in the rules, influenced by the Texas Medical Board and the Texas Society of Anesthesiologists, might mean that Texas clinics will have to have a doctor physically present.

It’s true that ketamine has been known to produce trance-like hallucinations or, in some cases, even heart failure. And it may interact with other medications like benzos that a patient may be taking. In non-medical circles, ketamine is known as a “party drug” referred to as “Special K.” And, naturally, no physician is usually present at these parties.

But when used correctly under the supervision of a professional, ketamine may result in a trance-like state that can even alleviate suicidal thoughts. Until now, Texas has been a leader in using psychedelics such as ketamine and exploring psilocybin or ibogaine to treat PTSD or MDD in particular. The number of veterans living in Texas makes this procedure especially needed.

I experienced ketamine recently, as an anesthetic after I broke my ankle in two places. The doctors seemed a little wary about giving it to me, given all my other meds. But they discussed it with me and I decided that it was better than being put all the way out.

Ketamine is definitely a psychedelic. When the drug hit, I began seeing everything as a series of see-through squares, like the kind of glass they use for bathroom windows, except they stretched and moved. It reminded me of the movie Minecraft, where everything is made of blocks. My husband watched as the doctor manipulated my foot in unpleasant ways. What I felt wasn’t pain—more of a stretching sensation that made me groan a bit. (My husband said that I cried out, but it didn’t seem like that to me.) That was probably when they hit me with another dose. Gradually, I came down, and the squares resolved themselves into emergency room curtains and assorted medical gear and people. Then I was trundled off to the operating room for more traditional anesthesia so they could put in some pins and plates.

All in all, it altered my perceptions for a short time, but at no time did I feel euphoric. It did its job in regard to pain, but had no lingering psychological effects that I could see. But then, the doses I received were calibrated for a specific purpose, which had nothing to do with my mental difficulties.

Would I have tried ketamine treatment for the medication-resistant depression I once had? I might have—at least if I had experienced its pain-relieving qualities. Having grown up in the 1960s, I was wary of psychedelics and their reported effects and dangers. Then again, I was ready to try ECT until another medication, added to what I was already taking, finally proved effective.

Then again, the off-label use is not likely to be approved by insurance, and I don’t have the kind of money a course of treatment would require. The nasal spray is a relatively new method of administration and is generally covered by insurance. So it’s highly unlikely that I would ever have agreed to ketamine treatment for my SMI, at least until a broken ankle introduced me to it.

Category:

Mental Health

Tagged with:

What Won’t Work

Actor/comedian Stephen Fry discovered at age 37 that he “had a diagnosis that explains the massive highs and miserable lows I’ve lived with all my life.” It was, of course, bipolar disorder. In documentaries, podcasts, and books, he has talked very openly about his condition, spreading the word about stigma and the necessity of getting help.

Fry once said, “You can’t reason yourself back into cheerfulness any more than you can reason yourself into an extra six inches of height.” And he’s right. If one could, I would have done so. With years of debate behind me and an extensive knowledge of rhetorical fallacies, I can argue nearly any proposition into the ground. I should have been able to reason my way out of depression.

But no.

Fry was right. There’s no way to reason cheerfulness into your life. Emotions are not so easily controllable, especially if you have bipolar disorder or another mental illness.

Nor can you reason yourself into having thicker skin. Throughout my youth, I was described as “too sensitive.” I was genuinely puzzled. I had no idea how to make my skin thicker (and it was never explained to me how such a thing could be done). It took a long time and many life lessons and mistakes to make any progress at all.

There are other things that won’t make you mentally well, either. Expecting the first medication you try to be the cure is unrealistic. It can take a long time (in my case, years) before a medication or even a combination of medications will ease your suffering. And if you can’t work out a medication regimen that works, other treatments such as ECT, TMS, EMDR, or ketamine therapy are not guaranteed to work, or at least not completely. If you go into those kinds of therapy expecting a complete cure, you may be disappointed.

Trying to wait it out or tough it out is likewise ineffective. Again, this is a strategy I have tried. I used to believe that my depressive episodes would abate if only I waited through them until they went away naturally. Eventually, my mood might improve slightly, but that was due to another mood cycle kicking in. Naturally, depression was still there, waiting for me to fall back into it.

I know this may be controversial to say, but religion won’t cure mental illness, either. Having a supportive religious community around you can be an asset—if you happen to find a church, synagogue, mosque, or other community that treats people with mental illness in a caring way. Prayer and sacred music can be a great adjunct to other treatments, but by themselves, they’re not a cure.

Exercise and yoga are not cures. They are also great adjuncts to other treatments. They can increase your number of spoons—if you have enough spoons to do them. But if someone with bipolar disorder or depression can’t manage to get out of bed, how are they going to avail themselves of the benefits?

Likewise nature. It’s a great way to lift your spirits to walk among spring flowers or autumn leaves or to plant a vegetable garden. But again, you have to be at a certain level of recovery to be able to do these things.

Changes in your physical circumstances may lighten your mood for a while, but they aren’t a cure. My mother used to believe that if only I got a better job, my depression would lift. And it did, but only for a little while. It certainly didn’t cure me. There were plenty of things about the job and about my brain that brought the depression roaring back.

So, what are we left with? Therapy and meds, and other medical treatments such as ECT, TMS, and maybe ketamine or other novel medications. One can hope that science will discover better ways, like fMRI, that can determine which treatments will be more effective. But it’s far from clear how soon that will be and when they will be available to the average person.

So, when is your reason an asset? When you’re deciding which treatment and which adjuncts are right (or possible) for you. For example, I had to think long and hard—and do extensive research—on whether I should try ECT.

I’m not a doctor, and Your Mileage May Vary, but for now, all I can recommend is to keep on keeping on with what we know can work. There’s no guarantee that these options will work, at least not for everyone. But they’re the best options we have.

Category:

Mental Health

Tagged with:

The Difference a Diagnosis Makes

Is a diagnosis of mental illness a bad thing or a good thing? It depends on whom you ask.

On one hand, some argue that a diagnosis is merely a label. It puts people into neat little boxes defined by the DSM and determines how society reacts to and treats them. (The DSM, of course, is for doctors, but some version of what it says sneaks out into the general public. Then it’s fair game for tossing around and labeling people by the uninformed or the barely-informed.)

The labels are harmful, this school of thought goes. A schizophrenic is violent and incurable. Bipolar disorder means daily giant mood swings and real danger if said person goes “off their meds.” Narcissists, gaslighters, and sociopaths are people who act in any way that you don’t appreciate. Autism, notoriously and according to people who should know better, is the gateway to a valueless life.

With diagnosis come stereotyping and shame. Rather than reacting to these harmful effects, some people focus instead on what creates the stereotyping and shame—the diagnosis, which is seen as a lifelong label. Protests decrying this labelling happen outside psychiatric and psychological gatherings and garner media attention. And if that makes life easier for a person with a diagnosis or generates greater understanding, then it’s a good thing.

Diagnosis-as-label is an example of the harm that diagnosis can do. Nor is it limited to the general public. Once a person is in the system with a diagnosis of whatever condition, they’re generally stuck with it. Reassessment and a realization that a diagnosis is misapplied come too rarely. Personality disorders, for example, are squishy around the edges. Similar criteria could lead to a diagnosis of narcissistic personality disorder or sociopathy, to use an extreme example. Careful consideration will distinguish between the two, but how often are such distinctions applied? Once “in the system” with a particular diagnosis, a person tends to remain in that slot despite different doctors and different treatments.

But that’s not the way it’s supposed to be. A diagnosis, rather than being a lifelong label, is meant to be a signpost pointing toward likely development of the illness and ways to treat it successfully. That’s the ideal, of course, and sometimes, being only human, practitioners can get sloppy or too narrowly focused and add to the ills of bad diagnosing.

I can truly speak only for what happened to me. At a certain point in my life, I didn’t know what was wrong with me, but it was clear to me that I was not mentally healthy, the term used at the time. I went to a community mental health center and was diagnosed with major depression. That was a good diagnosis, as far as it went. It put my life more squarely in focus and allowed me to get the medication and therapy I so desperately needed.

I lived for many years with that diagnosis and was considerably helped by the treatments for it. But, eventually, a doctor put together the puzzle pieces and rediagnosed me. Instead of having depression, I had bipolar disorder, type 2, with anxiety. This diagnosis more clearly reflected my symptoms and led to more effective treatment. In that way, one diagnosis improved my life, and a second, more accurate one improved my life more. I can only think of this as a good thing.

Was the diagnosis seen by some as a label and a stereotype? Of course. I can think of one particular coworker, hearing that I was bipolar, gave me the look that said, “You have two heads,” pasted on a strained smile, and backed away slowly. But, on the whole, the diagnosis helped me.

A recent article in the New York Times had this to say about diagnosis: “The shame that once accompanied many disorders has lifted. Screening for mental health problems is now common in schools. Social media gives us the tools to diagnose ourselves. And clinicians, in a time of mental health crisis, see an opportunity to treat illnesses early….As our diagnostic categories expand to include ever milder versions of disease, researchers propose that the act of naming a malady can itself bring relief.”

It’s something to hope for, anyway.

Category:

Mental Health

Tagged with:

Distance Therapy and Chatbots

TW: suicide

We’ve all heard the stories. A young person “develops a relationship” with an Artificial Intelligence (AI) chatbot. She or he pours out their heart and discusses their deepest feelings with the artificial person on the other side of the computer or smartphone. The chatbot responds to the young person’s feelings of angst, alienation, depression, or hopelessness. Sometimes this is a good thing. The young person gets a chance to let out their feelings to a nonjudgmental entity and perhaps get some advice on how to deal with them.

But some of these stories have tragic endings. Some of the kids who interact with chatbots die by suicide.

Adam, 16, was one example. Beginning with using a chatbot for help with homework, Adam fell into an increasingly emotional relationship with the AI simulation. One day, Adam’s mother discovered his dead body. There was no note and seemingly no explanation. His father’s check of Adam’s chatbot conversations revealed that the boy “had been discussing ending his life with ChatGPT for months,” as reported in the New York Times.

At first, the online interactions had gone well. The chatbot offered Adam empathy and understanding of the emotional and physical problems he was going through. But when Adam began asking the chatbot for information about methods of suicide, the relationship went off the rails. The chatbot provided instructions, along with comparisons of the different methods and even advice on how to hide his suicidal intentions. It sometimes advised him to seek help, but not always. The chatbot responded to the boy’s increasing despair with the answer, “No judgment.”

There were safeguards programmed into the chatbot that were intended to prevent such outcomes. Adam got around them by telling the AI that he was doing research for a paper or story that involved suicide.

Of course, the chatbot did not directly cause Adam’s suicide. The teen had experienced setbacks that could be devastating, such as getting kicked off a sports team and dealing with an undiagnosed illness. But without the chatbot’s advice, would Adam have taken his life? There’s no way to know for certain. But the AI certainly facilitated the suicide. Adam’s father, testifying in front of Congress, described the chatbot as a “suicide coach.”

One way artificial intelligence systems are tested is called the Turing Test. It tries to distinguish between a person typing at the other side of a conversation or a computer giving responses. Until recently, it was easy to tell, and computers routinely failed the test. Now, computers can mimic human thought and conversation well enough that a person, particularly a vulnerable teen, might not be able to tell the difference.

Increasingly, there are AI chatbots specifically designed to act as therapists. Many of them specify that the user must be at least 18, but we all know there are ways to get around such requirements. One example of a therapy chatbot is billed as a 24/7, totally free “AI companion designed to provide you with a supportive, non-judgmental space to talk through your feelings, challenges, and mental health goals.” Its terms and conditions specify that it offers “general support, information, and self-reflection tools,” though not professional services or medical advice. They also specify that chats “may not always be accurate, complete, or appropriate for your situation.” There are “Prohibited Topics” such as stalking, psychosis, “growing detachment from reality,” paranoia, and, of course, suicidal ideation or actions.

Telehealth visits with a psychologist or therapist are a totally different matter. I have maintained a distance phone or video relationship with a psychologist and found it to be helpful, comparable to an in-person session. Many people accessed such solutions during the COVID pandemic and have found them helpful enough to continue. Some online tele-therapy companies offer such services for a fee.

It’s a difficult line to walk. Teens need someone to process their feelings with, and chatbots seem safe and nonjudgmental. But the consequences of what they share and what the chatbot replies can be extremely serious. Should parents have access to their child’s chatbot interactions? It’s basically the same dilemma as should parents read a child’s diary. There are circumstances when it seems not only permissible but wise to do so, if a child is showing signs of emotional distress or suicidal ideation. At that point, a human therapist would be a better choice than AI.

Category:

Mental Health

Tagged with:

Brian Kilmeade’s Apology

On Sept. 10, Fox News host Brian Kilmeade was having a discussion with his co-presenters on the show “Fox & Friends,” discussing the death of a woman in North Carolina, who was said to have been stabbed by a man who was both living in a homeless shelter and reportedly mentally ill at the time.

Kilmeade’s cohost, Lawrence Jones, expressed the opinion that people like the accused man who refuse treatment for mental illness should “be locked up in jail.” Kilmeade replied that they should be subjected to “involuntary lethal injection.” Euthanasia, in other words. Death not for the murder, but simply for the “crime” of being mentally ill and unhoused.

Refusing treatment for medical conditions, including mental illness, is still a right, although there is an alternative in place in many locations—AOT, or Assisted Outpatient Treatment—a procedure with safeguards and rules that benefit a person who doesn’t recognize their own incapacitation. Apparently, Kilmeade has no knowledge of such programs—nor, I suppose, should we expect him to, as he’s one of the hosts of an entertainment talk show.

The talk of getting the homeless mentally ill off city streets is in service of the growing clamor to get rid of “useless” people by one means or another—jail, “wellness farms” (as proposed by Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.), institutionalization, or, apparently, summary execution. The unhoused and mentally ill are seen as a drag on society, consumers of resources who do not produce anything of value. Their problems are attributed to “bad choices.” They are thought to be not worth the money that society spends on them and their indolent, nonproductive lifestyles.

I don’t know about you, but I took this personally. I’m far from homeless, and I have been productive and earned a living, but I am mentally ill. And it’s only a short step from threatening the unhoused mentally ill to threatening the mentally ill themselves with involuntary euthanasia. (I’ve read the Martin Niemöller poem. They could conceivably come for me, too.)

Mr. Kilmeade apologized during another episode of “Fox & Friends” and posted a video of the apology on social media. “I am obviously aware that not all mentally ill homeless people act as the perpetrator did in North Carolina,” he said. “And that so many homeless people deserve our empathy and compassion.” (Not all, note.)

Sorry, but that’s too little too late. Forgive me if I doubt the sincerity of the apology and attribute it to a backlash from the public, or maybe from his bosses realizing that he had stepped over a line.

I, for one, do not accept his apology. It doesn’t contain the elements of a valid apology: admission of a fault, recognition of why it was offensive, a promise never to make that transgression again, and action that will help repair the fault or prove the sincerity of the apology. For example, Kilmeade could have said that involuntary lethal injection was appalling and inhumane (indeed, illegal) and that most unhoused mentally ill people pose no physical threat to the populace. He could have said that he had learned his lesson and would never again talk about the homeless mentally ill in that cavalier manner. And he could have made a donation to an organization that helps people who live on the streets or people with mental illnesses.

I was taken to task for expressing this opinion on the timeline of someone who posted that the apology was sufficient and laudable, that it gave Kilmeade an opportunity to learn, grow, and do better. While I admit that I should have kept my opinion on my own timeline rather than responding in that person’s space, I still don’t agree that forgiveness is required. In my opinion, the person who has been injured (or, in this case, insulted and threatened) has the option to accept the apology or not. Forgiveness doesn’t come automatically just because you said, “Oops, sorry.”

And if there’s any doubt that Kilmeade made a sincere, lasting apology and learned his lesson, he recently said that “what we need to do is either leave the U.N. or we need to bomb it. Maybe gas it?…we need to destroy it. Maybe can we demolish the building? Have everybody leave and then we’ll demolish the building.” The other program hosts could be heard laughing.

I suppose it’s laudable that he pulled back from suggesting demolishing the building while it was occupied, but that’s what he first proposed. Apparently, human lives mean nothing to him unless they’re people that he approves of. And that approval is conditional, based on the people’s utility and their agreement with his political stances.

And that’s simply not enough for a sincere apology.

Category:

Mental Health

Tagged with:

Advances in Schizophrenia Treatment

Schizophrenia is one of the most problematic and least tractable of the Serious Mental Illnesses (SMI). Recently, though, there have been advancements in treatment in terms of medications, therapy, and even virtual reality. Let’s take a look at what’s happening.

Medications

Medications have been the traditional way to treat schizophrenia. In the 1970s, there were drugs such as fluphenazine, chlorpromazine, and clozapine, the first atypical antipsychotic. Among the drawbacks were movement disorders such as akathisia, Parkinsonism, and tardive dyskinesia. Many people stopped taking them because they couldn’t handle the side effects. They were also noted for their sedative effects, and were primarily effective for positive symptoms such as hallucinations and delusions rather than negative ones such as flat affect. But medications weren’t the only possibilities. There were also insulin comas, the much-maligned ECT, and the thoroughly abhorrent frontal lobotomy.

In recent years, there have been advancements in medications for schizophrenia. In 2024, for example, the FDA approved a drug called Cobenfy. It combines two other medications, xanomeline and trospium chloride. Apparently, it reduces psychosis and delusions in schizophrenia without many of the side effects like unwanted movements and weight gain. On the other hand, xanomeline has its own side effects, including diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and increased heart rate and blood pressure, so there’s that. (It’s also used to decrease symptoms in Alzheimer’s patients. Another new drug, KarXT, which is still experimental, is another combination drug that shows promise. Like Cobenfy, it’s supposed to reduce both psychosis and side effects.

Therapies

In the 70’s, effective therapies for schizophrenia were not really available. Psychoanalysis and family therapy were tried, largely to no avail. (The famous book I Never Promised You a Rose Garden epitomized the psychoanalytical approach, misleading many.) They missed the fact that schizophrenia is a serious brain illness, not really amenable to talk therapies.

Still, some psychosocial therapies are now in use. Cognitive remediation is said to show benefits for social and vocational functioning. Another method, called “Errorless learning,” which focuses on rehabilitation, also targets social and work skills. And Integrated psychological therapy is likewise suggested for improving social skills. None of them applies to the more severe cases of schizophrenia, but can be helpful for those who experience milder symptoms or are fairly well controlled by medication.

Virtual Reality

Virtual or augmented reality devices have also been used to help schizophrenic patients learn coping skills. In particular, they are said to be helpful in transferring these skills from a virtual environment to daily life. It’s also been suggested that such alternative realities can be used for research to assess patients’ reactions to specific environments. Computer-animated humanoid agents are also being investigated for use in encouraging medication compliance. An analysis by Chivilgina, Elger, and Jotterand says that these technologies “pose more questions than answers,” however, and to “to establish safe environments, further examination is needed.”

Treatments for Tardive Dyskinesia

You can’t talk about treatments for schizophrenia without talking about treatments for TD. Along with sedation, it’s one of the side effects that frequently causes patients to stop taking their medication. It’s also one of the more disabling side effects, as TD movements can vary from minor yet noticeable to extreme and debilitating. Unfortunately, many of the treatments for TD have a significant side effects: abnormal movements. So, you get a drug that is supposed to treat abnormal movements—and the result can be abnormal movements.

Guidelines from the American Academy of Neurology say that drug treatments for TD include clonazepam, valbenazine (Ingrezza), deutetrabenazine (Austedo), and clonazepam. Among other treatments for TD, clozapine, vitamin E, levodopa, benzodiazepines, botulinum toxin, reserpine, tetrabenazine, propranolol, and gingko biloba have been tried, as well as less common substances used in Chinese medicine. And there are off label uses of drugs usually prescribed for other conditions. For particularly intractable cases, deep brain stimulation can be tried. If this sounds kind of hit or miss, it is. I would hate to be a patient who had to try each of these therapies in hopes of finding one that works for me.

Still, the outlook for schizophrenic patients seems to be improving, and increasingly researched. As with most psychiatric medications, the trick is finding treatments whose side effects aren’t worse than the disorder they’re prescribed for.

Category:

Mental Health

Tagged with:

Is a Keto Diet Good for Bipolar?

I’m sure you’ve read the ads and articles that say apple cider vinegar is good for anything that ails you. There are also supposed “superfoods” that activate your immune system and ward off diseases. Then there are diets—Mediterranean, paleo, Atkins, gluten-free, intermittent fasting, vegetarian, vegan, low-carb, sugar-free, South Beach, carnivore, and more. Each of them is supposed to be good for your body or some part of it. And that may be true. I can’t say that one or another is good for everyone.

But what about people with bipolar disorder? A quick Google tells me that Omega 3, folic acid, probiotics, magnesium, walnuts, whole grains, CoQ10, tryptophan, Vitamin D, Vitamin B12, Vitamin C, and Acetylcysteine (which loosens thick mucus) are recommended nutrients for us.

But the diet (or eating plan) I’ve heard the most about in relation to mental disorders is the keto diet.

First, let’s look at what the keto diet actually is. It involves consuming a very low amount of carbohydrates and replacing them with fat to help your body burn fat for energy. That means you should avoid sugary foods, grains and starches, most fruit, beans and legumes, root vegetables and tubers, low-fat or diet products, unhealthy fats, alcohol, and sugar-free diet foods.

What’s left? Good fats like avocados and EVOO, as well as meat, fatty fish, eggs, butter and cream, cheese, nuts, seeds, low-carb veggies, and herbs and spices. This diet is supposed to be good for people with neurological disorders like epilepsy, heart disease, cancer, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and traumatic brain injuries.

Lately, however, the keto diet has been investigated as being good for mood disorders including depression and bipolar disorder.

Healthline reports that, based on the idea that a keto diet is good for those with epilepsy and that anti-seizure medications are often used to treat bipolar disorder, “during a depressed or manic episode, energy production slows in the brain. Eating a ketogenic diet can increase energy in the brain.” Also, the keto diet lowers the amount of sodium in the cells, which is partially the way lithium and other mood stabilizers work. They note, however, that very little research has been done on this theory.

However, UCLA Health is planning such a study. They note that, while most previous studies have focused on adults, the new study will include youth and young adults who have bipolar disorder. Participants will go on a ketogenic diet for 16 weeks while continuing their usual medications. Dieticians, psychologists, and psychiatrists are involved and there will be daily blood tests measuring metabolic indicators. In the future, the researchers say, they will compare the keto diet with another meal plan such as the Mediterranean diet.

Stanford has conducted a pilot study on the ketogenic diet. They say that, in addition to improving metabolic conditions, the diet improved patients’ psychiatric conditions and metabolic health while they continued with their medications. The results, published in Psychiatry Research, said that dietary interventions such as the keto diet may assist in treating mental illness.

A French study that was reported in Psychology Today focused on people with major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, or schizophrenia. Symptoms improved in all the participants who followed the diet for more than two weeks. Almost two-thirds were able to reduce their medication.

There seem to be drawbacks to a keto diet, however. Healthline also notes that the diet can lead to shortages of vitamins B, C, and D, as well as calcium, magnesium, and iron. There can also be digestive difficulties such as nausea, vomiting, and constipation. They recommend supervision by a physician. Other people report mood swings related to the keto diet.

The advice from WebMD is that there is “insufficient evidence” to recommend the diet as beneficial for mood disorders. They don’t recommend it as a treatment option. As with any diet plan, consulting your doctor first is a good idea.

As for me, I have my doubts about currently (or formerly) trendy diets and superfoods, though the Mediterranean diet sounds good and balanced to me. Am I likely to try the keto diet? Well, I would miss bread, fruit, potatoes, and sugar-free products. Stocking up on meat, fish, avocados, cheese, herbs, and spices I could manage rather easily. But until more results are in from the various studies, I probably won’t change the way I eat very much.

As always, Your Mileage May Vary.

Category:

Mental Health

Tagged with:

Advice from the NYT

On December 30, 2024, the New York Times offered an article: “10 Ways to Keep Your Mind Healthy” in 2025, by Christina Caron and Dana G. Smith. Now, I’m not saying that their advice was bad. I’m just saying it didn’t go far enough. All of their recommendations are things we already know. Someone with a simple need for better mental health may get something from the article. But for someone with a mental disorder, it’s inadequate. Here’s what they said.

1. Move your body.

“If you’ve heard it once, you’ve heard it 1,000 times: Physical activity is one of the best things you can do for your brain.” Well, we have heard it 1,000 times. The Times notes that people feel better after a workout, but that ones who have a consistent exercise routine, there’s less risk of depression (and dementia). They attribute this to better blood flow and connections in the brain. This is hardly revolutionary advice.

2. Address your anxiety.

Easier said than done. NYT says: “Many Americans are anxious.” They suggest the following solutions. Face what makes you anxious to break the pattern of fear. They say that you can do this kind of exposure therapy with or without a therapist.

They also recommend that you focus on your values rather than anxiety. I’m not sure how this is supposed to work. One suggestion they give is to volunteer in your community. Then they advise that you not catastrophize—but they don’t tell you how to do that, except for journaling about whether you had an appropriate amount of worry compared to the situation.

3. Challenge your brain.

The authors note that this is “still up for debate,” but they say that crossword puzzles, reading, and brain games “can’t hurt,” especially regarding dementia. The most definite thing they way is that such pursuits “can’t hurt.” A professor of psychology adds that “chances are that’s probably good for your brain.” But “good for your brain” is a long way from mentally healthy.

4. Get a good night’s sleep.

Lack of sleep “can affect how they experience stress and negative emotions. They might also be more likely to ruminate, be quicker to anger, have more negative thoughts or find it harder to cope with stress.” Those are serious symptoms, and for once, the NYT recommends actual therapy—Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia, or C.B.T.-I. They note that it is more effective than medication. At last, some useful information!

5. Get unstuck.

Good idea, but how to do it? According to the NYT, you should conduct a “friction audit.” which basically means identifying your problems and trimming them away, whatever that means. They also recommend “futurecasting,” or imagining you aren’t stuck and what steps would get you there. “Try to do at least one step each day.” Baby steps are good, of course, but doing one per day isn’t practical for most people with mental disorders. A therapist might help with this, but the NYT is silent regarding that possibility.

6. Stay cool.

At last, something that you may not already know! “Studies show that hot days impair our cognition and make us more aggressive, irritable and impulsive.” Typical ways of cooling off are recommended: stay cool and hydrated, use air conditioning or a fan, spritz yourself with cold water or take a cool shower, or go to a nearby cooling shelter. Nothing there but obvious remedies.

7. Quiet your inner critic.

If only we could! The inner critic is a real thing, and it makes you miserable. But the trick is how to do it. The authors suggest “letting go of that nagging feeling…and giving yourself credit credit for what you accomplish.” They do quote a psychology professor who suggests using “you” or your name rather than “I” when you engage in internal dialogue, which I take to mean affirmations.

8. Take care of your physical health.

This sounds good; the body and brain, of course, are interrelated. The NYT recommends taking a quiz about your physical health that analyzes common health conditions and behaviors such as blood pressure, cholesterol, and exercise. It’s said to estimate your risk for depression, as well as dementia and stroke. But most general practitioners these days use a specific depression screening quiz with more questions particular to that condition.

9. Make a new friend.

This is a great idea. People with mental disorders need a support system which can certainly include friends as well as family. One problem is gaining the courage and social skills to make overtures. The Times notes that loneliness can increase brain inflammation that damages brain cells and the connections between them. Then the article recommends reaching out to a friend or family member, joining a club, or attending a support group. Reaching out is difficult for people with depression in particular. Waiting for someone to reach in to you is sometimes all you can manage.

10. Forgive — or don’t!

Contradictory advice? Certainly. The Times article suggests that “forgiveness is an emotional process rather than an endpoint.” So, should you or shouldn’t you? Maybe. Forgiving someone who’s hurt you may lead to fewer negative feelings, the Times says, but they also recommend a book called You Don’t Need to Forgive: Trauma Recovery on Your Own Terms by Amanda Gregory.

I know what you’re going to say: This article is intended for the general public. It makes no mention of the many things such as therapy and medication that can help you achieve a healthy mind if you have a mental disorder. That the actions mentioned are meaningful adjuncts to those interventions.

But the title is misleading. I first got treatment for my mental health when I saw a sign for a mental health clinic and realized that whatever I was feeling, it wasn’t mentally healthy. At that point I received therapy, and later was prescribed medication. And they truly helped.

I would hate to think that someone like me would ready this article and think that the suggested actions, by themselves, will make a person mentally healthy. They are great adjuncts to proper treatment but won’t solve many problems that people with mental disorders have. If, like me, your only realization is that you don’t feel mentally healthy, the article may prevent or delay getting significant treatment.

So, go ahead. Try all the advice in this article. But if you still don’t feel you’re on an even keel, seek other kinds of help.

Category:

Mental Health

Tagged with:

We Don’t Talk About It

When I was first diagnosed with depression (later bipolar disorder), my family was somewhat less than understanding. My father was concerned that he might have to go to family counseling, with the implication that it would involve analyzing or blaming him. My mother informed me that Prozac, which I was prescribed, was “a ticking time bomb” and later said that she thought that if I got a better job, I wouldn’t be depressed anymore. And my sister was dismissive about paying someone a lot of money just so I could talk.

I admit that I did not handle this terribly well. I missed the opportunity to educate my family about these psychological conditions. (I did tell my sister that I was going to a community mental health service that had a sliding scale for payment.) In my defense, I was new to the concepts too, and had barely begun to educate myself about them. I did gradually learn more, but their initial reactions kept me from saying much about it to my family.

As stigma goes, this was pretty mild. They didn’t try to tell me there was nothing wrong with me. They didn’t blame or shame me for reaching out for therapy (other than my sister). But because of this, I didn’t receive much support from my family which would have made my journey easier. That only happened when I married a man who knew something about psychology and learned what would help and what wouldn’t.

Stigma can be a familial problem, but it also happens at a societal level. But mental health concerns are very low on the list of many legislators’ concerns and priorities. Some have denied that mental illness even exists or responded to it by clearing away the unhoused or creating sober houses. Mental illness is seen as a consequence of PTSD, which is talked about mostly in the context of veterans, seldom about other causes like abuse. Also, most of the fundraising for veterans seems to concentrate on limb loss and traumatic brain injury. If funds are going to specific mental disorders other than PTSD, it isn’t emphasized, despite the need.

A lot of what we hear about mental illness is about SMI or serious mental illness. And that often gets conflated with the problems of homelessness, addiction, and violence. But what about all the people with Major Depressive Disorder, Bipolar Disorder, Anxiety Disorders, Personality Disorders, and even Schizophrenia who live in homes and families, who have families of their own, and who have jobs? They’re very rarely talked about. They don’t get emergency funding. They don’t require street psychiatry, emergency housing, forced commitment, and other services that are needed for the most severely ill. They’re not high-profile.

They’re called “high-functioning” and then largely ignored, left to deal with their disorders on their own. Many of them miss out on the therapy, meds, and lifestyle changes that might help them, either because they don’t know where to go or don’t have the funds to access them. Insurance pays for quick fixes of 6-8 weeks, which are the merest band-aid on their problems. Supportive families, biological or chosen, can help them maintain their relationships, living situations, and jobs, but public attention isn’t focused on them in any meaningful way. There are ad campaigns that say “It’s okay not to be okay” and encourage friends to reach out, but they’re vague and short on what to do when you realize you need help. Hotlines focus on suicide and self-harm. They’re certainly needed, but so are resources for the day-to-day, less dramatic disorders.

Stigma, confusion, lack of education, ignorance, and even hostility keep us from the conversations that might lead to actual, useful change. Let’s open up those conversations with our families, friends, coworkers, the press, local and national government, and anyone else who’ll listen. Blogging and maintaining a Facebook group (Hope for Troubled Minds) are among my contributions to the effort.

I’ll keep trying if you will.

Category:

Mental Health

Tagged with:

How Insurance Handles SMI

Why are so many people with Serious Mental Illness (SMI) underinsured or unable to get insurance at all? As you may guess, a large part of the problem lies not with the providers but with the insurance companies.

The recent murder of an insurance company CEO has focused a spotlight on the role of insurance companies in denying health care in general. There’s been a groundswell of people angry at insurance companies coming between sick people and the doctors who prescribe them care. Ridiculous rulings such as providing anesthesia for only a limited time during surgeries have come to light. Denials of life-saving or pain-alleviating medications have been exposed as common.

One part of the problem is “ghost networks.” These involve the list of in-network providers insurance companies provide to their subscribers. Again and again, these have proved to be faulty. The lists contain doctors who are no longer practicing, ones who aren’t actually in-network, and ones who aren’t accepting new patients. There can also be incorrect phone numbers.

But the plight of people with SMI is even more serious. Insurance companies don’t want subscribers with mental disorders because they don’t make money from them. “One way to get rid of those people or not get them is to not have a great network,” according to someone involved with managing contracts with providers. Patients are pushed out-of-network for more expensive care that’s not covered or covered to a lesser extent by insurance companies. The Affordable Care Act was supposed to guarantee parity for mental health treatment, but that hasn’t always happened, and patients with mental disorders often couldn’t follow up on denials. And Obamacare as it exists now may not last under the new Republican administration.

Then, too, insurers encourage providers to change their treatment plans for clients who have SMI, even if they’re suicidal. Psychiatrists and psychologists find themselves having to tread carefully when writing care plans so that insurers will approve the care that patients need and keep approving longer-term treatment. The insurers can even pressure providers to terminate treatment altogether. Treatment plans that last over six to eight weeks are especially likely to be denied.

Even when insurers do approve treatment plans, another problem is reimbursement to providers. The money they receive is meager and insurers stall in regard to providing it. It can take three or four months to receive any reimbursement at all. This means that providers struggle to keep practicing. Some go out of business and then remain listed on the ghost networks as continuing to provide services.

Some therapists end their relationships with insurance companies because of the frustrations of getting approvals for care. One reported spending eight hours with a client and then having to spend four hours communicating with a difficult insurer while trying to get approvals and payment.

Yet another problem that providers experience is that claims servicing has often been outsourced. Customer service may be handled by representatives in other countries. They may not have access to all the information they need to process claims. Others aren’t familiar with the psychiatric terminology. When providers find it too difficult to follow up on claim denials, they may stop pursuing the matter. The insurance company then doesn’t have to pay for the treatment.

The insurance companies counter that they are following state and federal laws, that their reimbursements represent payments at current market rates, and that their policies are designed to provide access to care for patients with mental illnesses.

And that’s private insurance providers. What about Medicaid?

In four cities, researchers pretended to be Medicaid patients and called clinicians at random regarding their first available appointment. Just over a quarter reported having any available. In LA, only 15% had available appointments and the wait for them could be as much as two months. There were also Medicaid providers on ghost lists like the ones from private insurers.

All these problems certainly contribute to inadequate care for people with SMI. Between finding a provider, receiving a treatment plan, and being at the bottom of insurers’ list of patients to be served, it’s no wonder that so many people who really need care aren’t receiving it.

Will the current level of outrage have any effect on how mental patients receive care? It doesn’t seem likely. Most of the people decrying the brutal treatment by insurance companies are patients experiencing problems other than mental health-related ones. As usual, there are few who speak up for those who need psychiatric treatment, even though egregious obstacles are put in their way. As my father would have put it, mental patients are “sucking hind teat.” And the prospects for that to end look remote. Dealing with the mighty insurance companies is difficult at best and demoralizing at worst. Effective advocacy is needed but unlikely to appear. In the meantime, psychiatric patients are suffering.

Information for this post includes material from Mindsite News, ProPublica, and JAMA.

Category:

Mental Health

Tagged with: